Quantum Break versus Uncharted 4 visual comparison

I stand erect and corrected!

 

Actually I think you can even see light bounce from the characters' hand touching the door as he opens it. Cool!

 

The issue is compressed youtube with compressed jpg.

 

I disagree with Scofield. I don't think the lighting is as sophisticated as he's suggesting (although I'm not saying UC or any other game in this vein is as or more sophsticated), and that door is either an accident as Milk suggests, or a deliberately creation specific to that (and similar) door(s). At 30 seconds we have a desk and a computer screen illuminating the room and the underside of the desk. The round, vertical handles of the door aren't showing any reflected highlights unlike the example green-door handles. At 1:07 the guy enters the passage where there's clearly no green light in effect. At 1:11 his side near the camera is illuminated by the light on the other side of him. At 2:55 we have a mteal bar-handle on a door with no upwards reflected light. At 3:25, another table underside lit by the lightsource above it. And at 4:40, another handle on a blue door with no reflected up light.

 

Not only the SSAO runs at 720p. Here the traces from the bullets are ~720p too. Notice the pixelated helmet.

 

It is not uncommon for AO to run sub native right? Do PC games run AO at full resolution?

 

It seems fair, the only thing I simply do not understand is why have the graphical settings at such a level that you cannot even render shadows past 2 meters ? I know shadows are expensive and a drawcell hog but surely you can make a compromise both in terms of quality of shadows and computation resources being spent elsewhere so as to not have shadows completely disappear more than 2 meters from you. Cascade shadow maps with a radius of 1-2 meters for the high quality shadows is distracting but not as distracting as max shadow render radius of 1-2 meters.

I remember seeing a gif where the underneath of a car was completely lit and then gets shadowed as a player approaches it, technically the underneath of a car should have simply been addressed by the AO.

Yea, HBAO+ is full res. while HBAO is half res afaik.

 

Lol! Good to know... XD

OT, I prefer ND's artistic approach. It is more pleasant to my eyes. So, I agree that QB characters look more realistic with regard to the looks (faces, basically).

 

That would be a really stupid way to waste man hours.

1) That just means not all lights cast shadows.
2) The handles don't show the same effect because they're not in the same position and neither is the light source.

Probably a fill light placed by an artist.

The handles of the yellow door are directly below the light source. That's not the case with the metal bar. Different position, different effect.

The underside of the desk seems to be mostly in the shade. Remedy's paper on QB's lighting says that their light-leaking solution isn't perfect. I guess this is an example of that.

Once again, light not directly above the handle. Then again, with such a dark albedo it would be hard to see the effect anyways.

 

I've been more wowed with UC4. Size, scale, animation, world density, IQ. The best is yet to come as well with UC...QB looks nice enough, but it seems somewhat like Halo 5 in that certain aspects of the visuals are simply pared back to keep performance up to snuff. World density is not something that stands out. It's clear to me the vast majority of the visuals in QB are simply focused on the swanky post processing effects, special fx etc etc.

 

I prefer wait the two games release to give a subjective point of view. Each games are looking very good.

After each games have some strong point and weakness. No infinite power and different visual choice means different compromise within hardware constraint...

 

It supports dynamic objects recieving the GI, which is pretty standard for any game. Dynamic objects or scene changes won't bounce nor oclude GI, except through their screen-space shaders. That's what I meant.

 

Comments like this have no place on the internet!

 

That would be the case with baked lighting, but not with irradiance volumes (which is what QB uses), hence why you can have large scale changes in the environment without screen-space artifacts such as this one:

(2:36)

 

Not the best comparison ever... UC4 has a lot of hand crafted assets, character faces in particular - whereas QB relies on lots of different scanning approaches for that. Totally different art direction, very different looking results. Maybe tech can be compared eventually, but I guess we should wait for final direct feed shots and possibly even GDC talks for that.

 

I think you've nailed what is upsetting my brain with regard to the visuals. Uncharted is a game full of artificial (hand crafted or tweaked) textures, models and animation but looks to be going for 'natural' environments. Quantum Break is using a lot of realistic captured content but blending in science fiction element and visuals that don't exist. It's an interest choice of blending styles for each game although for Uncharted it's probably less of a choice than a legacy expectation.

 

Some uneasiness in that video footage you quoted for Quantum Break. The people come across pretty creepy looking much like Uncharted 4 cut scenes that I've seen so far.

 

I think we should only make a graphical comparison because there is no way QB is technically more demanding than Uncharted 4. We all know Uncharted 4 is developed on a more powerful console.

 

Software comes under technology too. Not everything is about GPU flops or whatever.

Also: something something .... CPU ... something.

 

But we see this difference in almost every multiplatform game... and one of the best Sony's studio should not be able to maintain the gap in an exclusive title ? Let's be serious...

CPU what ? A 10% overclok ? What about GPGPU then ?